Holy shit, this should be in every writer's signature for easy reference when someone asks why these games can't account for every niche kink imaginable.
My only counter to this is stating it's an RPG. An open world western RPG to be specific.
As I said earlier(though under different context) I'm fine if the devs want to tell a specific story and I'm fine if the Champion has a pre-defined personality. I actively play JRPGs which for the most part do that and don't give me freedom to deviate and railroad you through their stories.
Though if I'm offered freedom to deviate then I expect to be able to deviate a lot. The fact that this is a text based game opens up pretty much every restriction that a AAA game has.
The only limitation is our imagination... as well as motivation. I'm not gonna give any of the devs or writers flak as I've personally experienced creative burn out and writer's block.
Though from what I've seen I would actually kind of prefer the game be
more restrictive than it is. I pointed out, several times now, that the Champion forms their own opinions without player input so when player input is asked for I kinda feel that it hurts the narrative. I haven't messed with the Dark Knight mode(Because it's not all too easy to get to for me) so I can't speak on it but the default Champion is consistently presented as a morally good character. Our decisions often just let us decide if we're Lawful Good, Neutral Good, or Chaotic Good. Though when I'm randomly given an option that can be described as evil or evil leaning neutral it just takes me out of the experience.
The TL;DR of the situation is that I rather be given a restrictive but well told story or a unrestricted average told story.
The best examples I can use is the Fable series.
The first game was a binary good fighting against evil narrative. Allowing the player to do evil deeds in between made very little sense. The third game told a very specific story with characters who had pre-defined personalities and also focused on an ultimate evil end boss. You can't decide how the player will react to important story beats regardless of how much of a dick bag you were. Fable 2 however pulled it off rather well in my opinion. The final villain was just some dude. The player could decide for themselves if they wanted vengeance or justice. You get a wish after killing said dude, or letting someone else do it, that lets you solidify who you were. Do you sacrifice personal happiness to restore the lives of those lost? Do you act somewhat selfish and wish for your family back? Or do you tell everyone to fuck off and get an unreasonable amount of gold for your own personal pleasure?
CoC-2 feels very much like Fable 1 with the protagonist of Fable 3.
Now despite my huge wall of text I don't have any ill feelings towards the writers or devs and trust me I feel pretty guilty because I feel like I'm gonna come off as being overly critical no matter how I present my writings but every time I tried shortening this I felt like I wasn't saying everything I needed to say.
I'll also assure that I am under no delusions that the writers and devs cater to my specific desires. As is despite some gripes I love CoC-2 and I love the work that they've contributed to other games such as CoC-1 and TiTs. I only wrote this huge wall of text because I do love the game and I genuinely hope anyone reading this doesn't take this post to mean the opposite.